KillJoy Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 (which the bible states) Would that be the King James VERSION? :gabe: KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRed05 Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 It's weird to me how some of you said that Atheists are the ones pushing their views down people's throats, when that's something I hate about Christians and I can't think of one incident in my life where an atheists has done the things that a lot of Christians do on a daily basis. I actually deleted an old friend from facebook the other day because I could not stand his stupid quotes and bullshit anymore. I have more people like that one there that do that, all Christians. I never see Atheists standing outside Christian music concerts protesting, or going on TV and saying ridiculous things like the people of Haiti deserved what happened to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRed05 Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Earth was not so widely believed to be flat throughout history. That's a myth. During the Roman Empire for instance, they believed the Earth was round. Then Christianity became the religion of choice for Constantine, next thing you know all people believe in God and the church rules and BAM...middle ages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spam Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Evolution=adaptation. Anyone believe in free will? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2pointslow Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Anyone believe in free will? :dumb: Not while the government is watching. inb4 zeefag trys to sell me a tin foil hat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Rarely do you hear physicists talk about distances in an x,y,z plane. I'm finding it hard to believe that a physicist every spent any time talking to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_notation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Beast Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Why does god keep picking on Cleveland? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 There are only two real and original thoughts in here... And Hal just cuz you can quote multiple people dosnt make you smart it means you just completed some random 101. No doubt you can formulate a sentence but don't pick on people cuz you think you are better than they are,as that dose not prove your point. Discussions about religion or any persons belief is just dumb. Due to people always taking it as an attack. Ya know the biggest issue I have with atheists is that they are worse than jesses Jackson when it comes to pushing their belifes on you. I don't really have anything to add just couldn't sleep. But all should live by this. I have my own beliefs and they do not require you to believe them. Who cares it's all the matrix anyway Quoting people has nothing to do with intelligence...:dumb: Thorne's arguments went beyond quotes, they were just incorrect. Eric, if you don't have anything to add just stay out of this thread. Thorne has admitted he went too far with attacks, and everyone else has been able to stay pretty much on an adult level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 It's weird to me how some of you said that Atheists are the ones pushing their views down people's throats, when that's something I hate about Christians and I can't think of one incident in my life where an atheists has done the things that a lot of Christians do on a daily basis. I actually deleted an old friend from facebook the other day because I could not stand his stupid quotes and bullshit anymore. I have more people like that one there that do that, all Christians. I never see Atheists standing outside Christian music concerts protesting, or going on TV and saying ridiculous things like the people of Haiti deserved what happened to them. In my experience, atheists try to be the loudest kids on the playground. I never said there aren't a lot of Christians, Muslims, etc... that try to convert people, but atheists continue to grow louder and louder. Then Christianity became the religion of choice for Constantine, next thing you know all people believe in God and the church rules and BAM...middle ages. Correlation vs. causation. P.S. During Constantine's rule Paganism was still the most dominant religion by far. It's also debatable if he was actually a Christian or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tractor Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 The problem with discussing religion (we'll stay within christianity this time) is that the vast majority of so called christians have no clue even though they claim to have read their bibles and don't even understand extremely basic parts there in. I'm not going to go any further in this discussion because to do so would only infuriate believers, and I simply will not get into a debate with non believers because their minds are made up. I will say though that my stance on creation is that a god must have created everything because its just to good for randomness. I am even very well versed in big bang theory and could recite nearly all of it from plank time to about now. Big bang actually works out pretty well, but "evolution" from single celled nothings to humans and entire eco systems is just a little hard to swallow. I always liked the "monkeys and typewriters" analogy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorne Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 (edited) I pose that everyone in this thread is a athiest. I just believe in one less god . I did go to far because i got pissed off. Edited July 9, 2011 by Thorne logitech k360 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appn88 Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Would that be the King James VERSION? :gabe: KillJoy the king james is known to be the best version in the english language Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 the king james is known to be the best version in the english language Why is it called VERSION? :no: KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trouble Maker Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Here's a pretty easy to read work of Anselm's Ontological Argument. Some of you may find it interesting. I'd also be interested to hear your counterpoints. http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc/phi203/ontological.html We can conceive things in our mind that may not necessarily exist in reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 We can conceive things in our mind that may not necessarily exist in reality. I know that. His argument goes deeper than that. Gaunilo used your point to criticize Anselm's argument. He used the example of a perfect island. We can imagine the perfect island, but it does not exist. My counter to that is that we cannot imagine the perfect island. There is always a step further to make it greater. To fall in line with the Ontological Argument, you have to first agree that we cannot think of anything greater than God. "Now we believe you are something than which nothing greater can be thought." That statement leads Anselm into his next point that God must exist because it would be greater for him to exist in reality rather than simply in our minds. Weird, but difficult to completely refute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 I pose that everyone in this thread is a athiest. I just believe in one less god . I did got o far because i got pissed off. Original christian's were referred to as atheist. Basically, when you go from worshiping hundreds or thousands of gods to just one, you are kind of an atheist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Original christian's were referred to as atheist. Basically, when you go from worshiping hundreds or thousands of gods to just one, you are kind of an atheist. Stop ignoring your Txts.... KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Stop ignoring your Txts.... KillJoy I don't have my phone. Ashley is supposed to be texting you, but she's being an idiot today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KillJoy Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 I don't have my phone. Ashley is supposed to be texting you, but she's being an idiot today. Then tell her to respond to her VMs.... KillJoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10_penn Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 1. He did not say he believes in creationism. If he does, that's flawed as we can prove it's incorrect. Let him expand upon his views before attacking. 2. There are scientists who do not believe in evolution as presented. You cannot discount someone simply because they do not accept a theory as fact. Without dissent, where would we be? 3. God's existence is absolute if only in our minds. You cannot argue that. You also cannot prove in absolute terms, at this time, (even if evolution becomes a law) that God does not exist. It's easy to say God does not exist because conventional religion got things wrong. How do you logically refute a God that functioned as a creator but as nothing more? That means this God would not be bound by Christian rules. While I do understand and agree with most of your points, the burden of proof is on the believers to prove the existence of God, not the disbelievers to prove he does not exist. A banana and a hand (a common example that theists use) is not sufficient proof for the existence of God. Neither is the Cosmological argument, where "stuff exists, it couldn't have been put there by itself, therefore, God exists." Using false reason to deduce an existence of a Deity is not proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 Why does god keep picking on Cleveland? That's easy. He ran out for material in Detroit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Spam Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 I'm finding it hard to believe that a physicist every spent any time talking to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_notation Way to take what i said out of context dumbass. :dumb: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hal Posted July 9, 2011 Report Share Posted July 9, 2011 While I do understand and agree with most of your points, the burden of proof is on the believers to prove the existence of God, not the disbelievers to prove he does not exist. A banana and a hand (a common example that theists use) is not sufficient proof for the existence of God. Neither is the Cosmological argument, where "stuff exists, it couldn't have been put there by itself, therefore, God exists." Using false reason to deduce an existence of a Deity is not proof. No, the burden of proof lies with whomever is making the original claim. If an atheist decides to start an argument, the burden lies with him. The opposite is also true. Typically the people trying to shift the burden of proof are the ones that realize they cannot possibly prove anything. Actually, they are using logical arguments that are valid academically. Take the design argument for instance. A watch must have a creator, therefor the universe (another logical and orderly thing) must also have a creator. There's obviously a lot more too it, I'm just paraphrasing. That argument is just as strong as the typical "in the beginning there was nothing, which then exploded..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
appn88 Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 Why is it called VERSION? :no: KillJoy sorry translation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
10_penn Posted July 10, 2011 Report Share Posted July 10, 2011 No, the burden of proof lies with whomever is making the original claim. If an atheist decides to start an argument, the burden lies with him. The opposite is also true. Typically the people trying to shift the burden of proof are the ones that realize they cannot possibly prove anything. Actually, they are using logical arguments that are valid academically. Take the design argument for instance. A watch must have a creator, therefor the universe (another logical and orderly thing) must also have a creator. There's obviously a lot more too it, I'm just paraphrasing. That argument is just as strong as the typical "in the beginning there was nothing, which then exploded..." You have it backwards. Atheists are not making any extraordinary claims, the theists are. And as you are probably aware, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." While this might be a difference of opinion between you and me, and respectfully so, the majority of logical, reasonable people would disagree with you. Saying that there is no God is not an extraordinary claim, where on the contrary, saying that there is a God and that the Bible is factually accurate IS an extraordinary claim. This requires the burden of proof, which there is none. And just like you said : the people trying to shift the burden of proof are the ones that realize they cannot possibly prove anything. This goes for the theists, too. The big bang theory does not ever say that there was nothing, it says that there was a singularity. A single point at which all matter in the universe existed. A point of infinite density, heat, and energy. This extraordinary claim is backed up by mountains of extraordinary evidence, from galaxies redshifting away to lab tests done in the particle accelerators of CERN in Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.